Just not cricket

[MartinJG]

Well Team

Back in April I was on the receiving end of a slow motion rear end shunt. An Aston Martin DB wotsit was the one wot dunnit. Let me assure you, two tons into less than one most certainly does not go. The back went in like an egg but it did its job and I was absolutely fine apart from a little bit of whiplash. I think the Aston Martin had a few hairs out of place and the number plate was ever so slightly rearranged. Shame. The driver was very decent about it all and went without a fight. Unfortunately, my Jazz Mk1 did not make it and was a write off. So decisions, decisions. Long story short, I replaced it with a Mk2. Had it a few months now so had chance to evaluate it. All in all, aside from the well known lower end torque advantage in the Mk1, I would say hands down it is a much better car all round....except....there  is no long wave. What an earth were they thinking back in HQ? Clearly not much. How an earth are we supposed to listen to Test Match Special apart from the odd moments where we have to pinch airspace from Five Live (Cringe). Clearly, they just did not think it through. I was beginning to wonder if I had a lemon so I checked with Honda. 'Yep. It was an oversight, sir. Sorry'. That aside, it's a great little car. A few gripes. Same vague steering though slightly improved. Horrible throttle/clutch action and I personally find 1st and 2nd a little too close and nerve wracking on the torque front especially when doing roundabouts etc where you really want a little power in reserve to pull away comfortably rather than having to reach for the revs. I do find myself having to slip the clutch a bit sometimes which I do not like but it keeps me out of trouble. I can see how the CVT would be useful here with the torque conversion. Had a hint of EGR wobble at low revs but a bit of exercise seems to have sorted that out. Better seats and driving position for my taste though I could do with a couple of inches extra legroom but that is normal for me. If you are prepared to use the revs, 3/4/5 gear ratios seem fine and it certainly hums along nicely. Currently, the fibometer is reading 46.5 but the real figure is @43. Been onto Honest John's 'real MPG confession board' and lodged my numbers so expect the average to plummet. All in all very pleased, except for the radio that is...

[stuartbooth]

I have exactly the same model VTEC 1.4 EX 78,000 miles on a 60Reg (built in UK)and I can't wait to get rid (National or Postcode Lottery permitting). At 50K I persuaded my dealer and Honda to go halves on New front Discs and rear Shocks. Now at 78k the clutch is truly on its way out - not that it has ever pulled away in 2nd at roundabouts or traffic lights, even if I have just slowed through the gears to 10mph. and am driving through.
 
My previous model was an 04 Reg 1.4 DSI Sport, which I ran up to 128k without a single problem (it was built in Japan) Battery OK, Clutch OK, Brakes and Discs OK, 6tyres in 41/2 years, Petrol consumption often drove at 55/gallon, no problems pulling away. etc., etc.

What Happened??

[MartinJG]

Stuart

That doesn't sound great. I was rather hoping it would just keep on going fuss free. I recall someone on the board (Ozzie?) got more than 230,000 on his hybrid. Seems clear to me that cars built after the 90's are just not as well engineered across the board. I know the Mk3 has had a number of niggles in build quality and reliability. Believe it or not an ex Honda dealer advised me to avoid a Mk3 with its new fangled bits and bobs and go with a Mk2 used. Problem is down to the disposable culture innit. I watch the Scotty Kilmer 'show' on You Tube and he confirmed this. Cars are just no longer built to last. However, although he is a Toyota fan overall, he concedes that Honda make the best engines. A crumb of comfort there. Fingers crossed all the other bits hang on in there for as long as poss.

Ps - Note to original post. I should have said 'ride the clutch' as opposed to 'slip'. Subtle difference.

[culzean]

Don't know about you guys driving style to need new discs at 50k and a new clutch at 75 k. Apart from rear discs on my wife's mk2 ( which rusted away and did not wear out) nothing gone wrong in over 70,000.  I have never needed a new clutch on any Honda I have had ( even after covering 190,000  miles in a 1996 Civic with only cambelt discs, pads, exhaust and battery replaced)  or on any other car except a Vauxhall Viva so it was expected. I have a brother-in- law who regularly rides the clutch instead of putting handbrake on, and he needs new clutches regularly - and always blames the car.  I don't know where you get the idea older cars were made to last and new ones aren't - before about 1980 cars used to rust away in about 5 years and need an engine overhaul every 70,000 miles or so, now cars last at least 20 years and 200,000 miles without drama.

[MartinJG]

I bought the car privately with full service history at Honda dealers but I had to check a couple of details with the servicing department for clarity, one of which was a rattling sound at around 2,000 RPM but only ever under load. Sounded like a heatshield but I checked it and seems fine. Records show they found some gravel inside which was removed. It looks clear but there could always be the odd piece that is just not visible and vibrating. However, he mentioned there are two heatshields (one to the left?) which I did not know. I need to have a look next time it is up on ramp. I asked him about clutches as I thought there might be a connection. He reckoned they were rock solid on clutches (subject to use of course) and could not remember having to change a clutch on a Jazz although I suspect most people go to an independent. I personally have never had clutch issues in more than 30 years of driving and I have clocked up quite a few miles in that time.

[culzean]

The clutches and brakes on low annual local mileage cars get used proportionally more than on higher mileage cars driving 'motorway miles' - just another reason not to go for cars that have very low mileage for their age (probably lots of cold running and stop-start driving in low gears, probably with a coated up CAT and a stuck EGR).  On my first 1.5 V-Tec Civic even the tappets were not adjusted in 190,000 miles, and the engine did not use a drop of oil between changes and always started first turn of the key and passed emissions tests on every MOT,  the emission readings were as low as when car was new.

[MartinJG]

Yes. Agreed re high milers. I guess that old adage applies. Better to wear out than rust out.

On the bit concerning older cars. Think you misunderstood or I was not clear. The point I was making is that cars generally seem to have peaked in longlife durability in the 90's (early 00's). It's not that they can't build them, it's just that over engineering does not make sense. Mass production, legislation, and the big kicker, finance, all point to short termism. Mercedes, the benchmark,  realised this back then and cut back on the over engineering for which they were renowned. Many others followed suit. From 00's onwards, the industry was no longer incentivised to concentrate on longivity and build quality and instead concentrated on gadgets, gimmicks, weight reductions, complex electrics, plastics which is all part of the low cost high tech manufacturing trend.

PS - I have seen quite a few of the new style Honda Civics where the paint has simply chipped or been scuffed away to reveal the black composite of the front bumper. It's a silly design anyway and completely unnecessary in my view but it looks really tatty and is not a good ad for Honda.

[culzean]

I can remember a time before large plastic bumpers when stone chips and salt turned the front of your car into a right mess of chipped paint and corrosion, now if the paint gets knocked or chipped it does not rust at all. Likewise the use of zinc coated steel ( not full galv but a thin coat of electroplating zinc ) means that any chipped paint does not allow corrosion to travel under the paint - I can also remember a time when you poked a bubble on the paint and there was no metal left underneath so you ended up with a hole. A lot of car parts you don't see ( chassis members etc )  have an electrophoretic paint system applied that bonds with the steel and prevents corrosion.

Modern cars are much better built than they ever have been, with better safety and crumple zones which means people walk away from crashes that would have killed them a few years ago. Engines are also better, more powerful and much more reliable than they have ever been.


I agree some of the latest gimmicks are hardly worth having and would be unnecessary if you could get drivers to pay attention to the road and not their phone or infotainment screen.

[MartinJG]

Yes , it's not the composite that's the problem. That makes absolute sense to me. It's the undercoat/bonding agent and the thickness of the final coat. Having looked at the bumpers of some of the newer cars, it looks like the paint gave up without much of a fight. Hate to see how they fare in Paris where they literally squeeze into parking spaces and a little shoving here and there is par for the course.

[Jocko]

squeeze into parking spaces and a little shoving here and there is par for the course.

Sums up my parking, exactly!
There was one occasion, when I had my Saab 99 (remember the "bumpers" on them), when I had squeezed in between two cars using the "gently till they touch" method. I left my wife in the car while I popped to the shop, and on my return she said that the driver sitting in the car in front had come out to speak to her saying, "Your man bumped my car as he was parking". Her reply was, "Speak to him, he's the driver". Needless to say he never came near me. So I gave his car another nudge on the way out!

[MartinJG]

Yes, but a Saab 99 was quite high in the pecking order. Never ceases to amaze me how certain cars seem to command kudos in the eyes of some drivers. A friend had a couple of Saab Turbos and they went like rockets but the servicing bills were horrendous. He then decided it was time for a Porsche 928 which was really just a huge V8 with a body attached to it and completely useless down narrow country lanes and streets. That's where something like the Jazz scores well. Trouble is, out on the open roads, it tends to be regarded as open season. Lost count of the number of times I have been minding my own business overtaking in the fast lane only to be met with a knee jerk reaction on the throttle and the swinging dick routine. A bit tedious really. I've often thought it would be great to have an LED screen on the rear parcel shelf connected up to the fibometer and flashing the MPG as you drive past.

[Beaver]

Yes, but a Saab 99 was quite high in the pecking order. Never ceases to amaze me how certain cars seem to command kudos in the eyes of some drivers. A friend had a couple of Saab Turbos and they went like rockets but the servicing bills were horrendous. He then decided it was time for a Porsche 928 which was really just a huge V8 with a body attached to it and completely useless down narrow country lanes and streets. That's where something like the Jazz scores well. Trouble is, out on the open roads, it tends to be regarded as open season. Lost count of the number of times I have been minding my own business overtaking in the fast lane only to be met with a knee jerk reaction on the throttle and the swinging dick routine. A bit tedious really. I've often thought it would be great to have an LED screen on the rear parcel shelf connected up to the fibometer and flashing the MPG as you drive past.

Happy to be shot down in flames for the pedantry, but there isn't any such thing as "The Fast Lane" in the UK.   I think this is where some people have the wrong idea of driving and why they occupy the overtaking lanes, as they regard the left lane/s as something else that doesn't exist - "The Slow Lane/s".

If drivers actually learned to drive, and used all lanes correctly, I think traffic might flow more efficiently.
 

[MartinJG]

Yes. You are right, but I think the 'overtaking lane' is, or at least, was generally referred to as the fast lane. Not anymore of course now that the wisdom of the traffice authorities has reached new heights and they have declared that the 'slow lane' can be used as the 'fast lane' (overtaking lane) if traffic in the 'fast lane' (overtaking lane) is obstructing the flow of traffic and should really be in the 'slow lane'. What is more, I believe they can issue fines to drivers in the fast lane (overtaking lane) when they should really be in the 'slow lane'. A potential bugger's muddle and a recipe for idiots if ever there was one.

[Jocko]

wisdom of the traffice authorities has reached new heights and they have declared that the 'slow lane' can be used as the 'fast lane' (overtaking lane) if traffic in the 'fast lane' (overtaking lane) is obstructing the flow of traffic

Can you link to any official notice of this?

[culzean]

wisdom of the traffice authorities has reached new heights and they have declared that the 'slow lane' can be used as the 'fast lane' (overtaking lane) if traffic in the 'fast lane' (overtaking lane) is obstructing the flow of traffic

Can you link to any official notice of this?

Don't know if anything has changed but it has always been OK to overtake ( undertake ) on the left when motorway is full of traffic when traffic stopped and some lanes moving ( like M5 and M6, but deleted the 'moving' bit on M6 ).  I have noticed when traffic is moving normally and RH lane is not busy that some people are ducking into LH lane to 'undertake' someone they think is going too slow in centre lane, IMHO this is totally unacceptable and downright dangerous at 60 / 70 miles an hour. 

I have to laugh at some drivers, especially on M6 in slow moving traffic who keep changing lanes because one may be moving 1 mph faster that the one they are in,  if you stay in same lane you pass these people many times,  don't they realise that others are moving into the faster flowing lane as well, which slows it down,  and by traffic leaving the slower lane it speeds it up (so they move into faster lane - repeat the above scenario) LOL.  BMW and Audi drivers are especially pi55ed off when they see other cars in their lane doing less than 90.

Rule 268

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/motorways-253-to-273

Happy to be shot down in flames for the pedantry, but there isn't any such thing as "The Fast Lane" in the UK.   I think this is where some people have the wrong idea of driving and why they occupy the overtaking lanes, as they regard the left lane/s as something else that doesn't exist - "The Slow Lane/s".

If drivers actually learned to drive, and used all lanes correctly, I think traffic might flow more efficiently.
 

The 'fast lane' has been called the BMW lane for a long time now,  if I am in nearside lane I normally move to centre lane when approaching motorway junctions as a courtesy to people entering the motorway to give them some room.   I really love the drivers who are in and out of nearside lane like a fiddlers elbow and cause people in the centre lane doing 70 to brake, it is painful to watch people continually moving to nearside and then within a few hundred yards they come up against slow traffic ( Doohhh ) and pull back into centre lane and seem happy to keep doing it 'ad nauseum'.